background

Blog

Latest News Thumbnail

Are corporates using the BRSR loopholes rope to climb up?

Sonal Desai


Are corporates using the BRSR loopholes as a means of ascent?

Recent surveys and reports have brought to light not just the lapses in the questionnaire format developed by the market regulator, but also how the corporate sector has leveraged the BRSR loopholes for its benefit.

WriteCanvas has highlighted how certain companies have utilized experts to help them navigate the different regulatory requirements and mandates mostly by tick-boxing.

The reasons these companies have been able to get away with greenwashing are that there are no metrics to measure a corporate’s sustainability/ESG claims and the callous attitude of the watchdogs to conveniently look the other way.

This gives the corporate not just the wings to skirt the most pressing issues, but also ignore the red flags if any are raised. For example, in a recent circular, the National Stock Exchange has provided specific examples of how large corporates are providing insufficient details, or misrepresenting the facts by placing them under different subject heads.

Another survey by the CSE which studied 28 random reports of 14 listed companies remarked that the companies did not provide the details in most instances.

The BRSR framework in India is the first to mandate the sharing of detailed environmental performance and compliance data in the public domain.

External experts and internal auditors are supposed to keep a vigil over the information and content right from the concept till the stage when the last signatory signs it.

Identifying the problem:

Sadly, a majority of them cannot pull the plug when needed. I am certain that almost all of them can identify the BRSR loopholes and also have the solutions or refer to solutions experts.

CSE Program Director, Industrial Pollution, Nivit Yadav, believes transparency should drive investor decision-making. However, there’s room for improvement, and SEBI reviews guidance notes and BRSR format regularly.

But in a hazy world where the head honchos are busy signing M&A agreements and expanding operations with an eye on the stock market, the BRSR report is just one fly in their tea cup, possibly an irritant that needs to be tick-boxed and filed away.

The fact that some of these regulations mandate a board member to be a part of the sustainability/ESG committee can make a difference, is fast gathering dust.

The CSO, CRO significance:

I am by no means saying that the BRSR reports are fudged or the information is false. I am reiterating the points that the watchdog as well as the critics have argued–the corporates are answering all the questions, filling all the boxes, supplementing all the links, and providing internal and external audit reports. And yet, there is not a single organization globally that can claim to have met one regulatory obligation without leveraging a loophole.

As per a Havard Business Review article, the rise in corporate appointing of a chief sustainability officer (CSO) is largely due to the increasing popularity of the term, but there is still a lack of clarity about CSO’s tasks and responsibilities, leading to fragmented ownership, internal competition, and inefficiency. This confusion is partly due to the lack of history and benchmarks for the CSO role.

Secondly, traditional risk management methods are insufficient for complex risks, Companies also require a holistic approach with a Chief Risk Officer to oversee risk profile and board liaison.

The time is ripe to face the truth. The truth is that the corporate has not been able to fulfill all the obligations as demanded by the BRSR mandate. That acceptance is the first step in the right direction. This alone will require the team to look for and identify any gaps or weaknesses and then devise plans of action to close those gaps.

Our take:

Let BRSR be your friend in your sustainability journey. Let it not be the four-letter word for you to fear, and comply with the fear.

Use the pathways created by SEBI as your guideline. Instead of making it an ego hustle, pinpoint the loopholes in the questionnaires/format to the regulator when it releases consultation papers.

In all honesty, corporates are investing money, time, resources, and effort to become sustainable. The reasons can be many: regulatory, corporate policy, government action, geographic expansion, or a sincere effort to be a sustainable business.

Overall, the NSE circular and the CEI survey have come as eye-openers for all the stakeholders. This is not just a compelling pull-and-push theory or story, but a collective effort for a sustainable business, a greener planet, and able governance!

 


Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

background

Blog

Latest News Thumbnail

FSI CSOs Taking Responsibility for Net-Zero Tasks

Sonal Desai


The role of CSO or chief sustainability officer in the rapidly growing financial services industry is changing. More and more CSOs are taking proactive steps to mitigate climate change in a bid to limit global warming to pre-industrial levels.

It must be noted that the IPCC has warned that to limit global warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius, emissions must peak before 2025, then decrease by 40% by 2050, and a quarter by 2030.

Commitments:

A recent Deloitte and the Institute of International Finance (IIF) survey reveals that FSI leaders are aware of time constraints and have shifted their approach to managing net zero internally. According to the survey, 45% of firms now have a chief sustainability officer (CSO), with more business functions taking responsibility for specific net-zero tasks.

The firms must be at the forefront of a whole economic transition to meet decarbonization targets, the Deloitte study notes.

It found that a majority of the world’s largest publicly traded companies have yet to announce net-zero targets. Nearly two-thirds of the companies have not fully specified how they plan to reach them. However, global financial firms are moving ahead at speed, with rapid growth in net-zero commitments, particularly through the Glasgow Financial Alliance for Net Zero (GFANZ).

Key findings:

Financial firms must transform themselves and manage risks to drive real-world change, engaging with customers and markets, and designing credible decarbonization strategies to transition economies to a low-carbon future.

A net-zero commitment is crucial for firms to meet the climate challenge, leading to increased product innovation, enterprise engagement, and faster progress on data sourcing.

The CEO delivers the net-zero strategy, which requires tight program management across multiple divisions and operating layers.

Over 70% of firms now have a CSO or equivalent, and CSOs must be agile change agents. Talent is also increasing, with over 50% hiring to deliver net-zero strategies.

Firms are shifting their focus to new value drivers and opportunities, launching new products to accelerate clients’ transitions.

Risk skillsets are in high demand, and modeling methodologies are maturing rapidly. Firms must design credible decarbonization strategies, focusing on data, communication, and the ecosystem.

The key to effective net-zero communications is transparency, accountability, and authenticity. The only way to meet the unique nature of the climate challenge is through extensive collaboration across the entire ecosystem, including peers, clients, scientists, NGOs, governments, and regulators.

The regional divide:

The survey of global financial firms reveals significant variations in their approach to implementing and executing net-zero commitments.

The study analyzes climate risk management in businesses across different regions. Most firms incorporate net zero into risk management, but regional variations were observed. North America and the rest reported basic integration, while APAC and European businesses had more integration.

Overall, regional confidence in data accuracy was low.

Businesses in APAC and Europe frequently use shadow carbon pricing, with NGOs moderately influencing net-zero commitments. Financial sector cooperation with governmental bodies and public institutions is crucial for energy transition.

European respondents prioritize societal expectations and regulatory compliance, while North American respondents highlight the market opportunity’s scale.

Asia-Pacific participants highlight physical factors escalating climate risk, prompting businesses in developing nations and emerging markets to address the concerns of significant foreign investors.

Businesses in many geographical areas exhibited a similar pattern of integration. However, North American businesses showed similar integration patterns but reported low net-zero strategy integration with overall corporate strategy, customer screening, and product innovation.

Businesses in all regions agree that their governance systems do not effectively represent their net-zero objectives, with North America reporting the least updates or revisions.

The way forward:

The sector already shows an appetite for this challenge and an undertaking to help green the global economy. A growing number of financial institutions have pledged to make their portfolios net zero by 2050 or sooner, and a few have already started measuring their financed emissions.

 


Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

background

Blogs

Latest News Thumbnail

How different is CSR from ESG or BRSR?

Renjini Liza Varghese


In recent years, Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) considerations have gained traction among corporate boardrooms in India. ESG is increasingly becoming a critical aspect of board discussions as companies realize that compliance with ESG frameworks can significantly impact their long-term growth and sustainability.

Don’t CSR activities cover for ESG? How different is BRSR reporting from BRR? Is it really going to affect my organization as the size is comparatively smaller? 

These are some of the frequent questions that come my way during my preliminary interactions with organizations that consult me for ESG. Through a series of articles, I will try and clarify the doubts. What I have realized is, awareness in terms of narratives will play a crucial part in shaping the NET ZERO journey. 

Today, I want to touch upon the CSR vs ESG topic. 

CSR or ESG? 

Firstly, it is important to understand the difference between CSR (Corporate Social Responsibility) and ESG. CSR is the voluntary commitment by companies to contribute to society, while ESG factors a broader range of issues such as climate change, human rights, supply chain management, and diversity and inclusion. While CSR initiatives are crucial for companies, they do not necessarily cover all aspects of ESG. On the other hand, ESG is essential in assessing a company’s overall sustainability.

It is essential to note that ESG discussions in the boardroom are not about philanthropy or charity. Instead, ESG considerations are strategic decisions that can impact a company’s long-term success. In recent years, CXOs (Chief Executive Officers, Chief Financial Officers, and Chief Operating Officers) have come to recognize the potential risks associated with ESG and are taking a proactive role in managing them. They understand that ESG issues can impact their company’s reputation, financial performance, and shareholder value. As a result, the visibility of ESG discussions at the CXO level has significantly increased.

In particular, the Sustainability Officer or Chief Sustainability Officer (CSO) role is gaining prominence in the boardroom. The CSO is responsible for overseeing the company’s ESG initiatives and ensuring they align with its overall business strategy. The CSO provides a vital link between the board and the company’s ESG objectives and ensures that ESG considerations are integrated into the company’s decision-making processes.

 Another meaningful change in the boardroom is the increased transparency and accountability regarding ESG issues. Companies are now disclosing more information about their ESG initiatives in their annual reports, sustainability reports, and other public disclosures. This increased transparency allows stakeholders to evaluate a company’s ESG performance and hold it accountable for its actions.

I will come back soon with my POV on BRR Vs BRSR. Soon! 

 

 


Tags: , , , , , , , , , , ,


Fatal error: Uncaught Error: Call to undefined function twenty_twenty_one_the_posts_navigation() in /home2/writecxc/public_html/wp-content/themes/twentytwentyone-child/archive.php:31 Stack trace: #0 /home2/writecxc/public_html/wp-includes/template-loader.php(106): include() #1 /home2/writecxc/public_html/wp-blog-header.php(19): require_once('/home2/writecxc...') #2 /home2/writecxc/public_html/index.php(17): require('/home2/writecxc...') #3 {main} thrown in /home2/writecxc/public_html/wp-content/themes/twentytwentyone-child/archive.php on line 31